Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

versus


The Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XX8II of 1958), Schedule, Part II and Settlement Scheme No. VIII Properties have already been transferred before the issuance of Settlement Scheme No. VIII. Is not available for.

1968 S C M R 1316

Present : Fazle‑Akbar, C. J. and Sajjad Ahmad, J

MESSRS TALIB HUSSAIN NOOR HUSSAIN‑Petitioners

versus

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN SIDDIQI AND 3 OTHERS Respondents

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 63 of 1968, decided on 27th June 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 29th November 1967, in Writ Petition No. 684/67).

Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act (XXVIII of 1958)

, Sched., Part II and Settlement Scheme No. VIII‑Property already transferred prior to promulgation of Settlement Scheme No. VIII‑Not available for transfer to a local after promulgation of Scheme.

Saeedur Rahman Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Raja Abdur Razzaq, Attorney for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 27th June 1968.

JUDGMENT

SAJJAD AHMAD, J.

‑The property in dispute bearing No. 8/183, situated in the Main Bazar, Lala Musa, consisting of a house and a shop, was transferred as a single entity to the respondent, Muhammad Hussain‑a displaced person. The P. T. O. was issued to him in 1959 and the P: T. D. in January 1966. Muhammad Hussain has since transferred a portion , of the property to respondent Sh. Sanaullah.

The petitioner protested against the transfer of the shop which he claimed was separate from the house and of which he was in possession as a local. He submitted miscellaneous applica tion to the authorities but did not file a regular appeal in spite of being told to do so until the 30th of October 1966 when it had become hopelessly time‑barred and was rejected as such.

The petitioner's plea that he did not submit an appeal because as a local he did not have a locus standi until the promulgation of Scheme No. 8, on the 16th of November 1965, was rightly repulsed by the Settlement Authorities on the ground that the property having already been disposed of, was not available for transfer under Scheme No. 8 and also because, the petitioner filed his appeal after the lapse of 11 months even from the date of the promulgation of the Scheme.

No fault can be found which the action of the Settlement authorities. The petitioner's Writ Petition, in the High Court, was rightly turned down and we dismiss this petition.

Leave refused.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
jobs for fresh advocates from Mangowal lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.